| Literature DB >> 33976768 |
Remington J Moll1, Jon T McRoberts2, Joshua J Millspaugh2, Kevyn H Wiskirchen3, Jason A Sumners3, Jason L Isabelle3, Barbara J Keller3,4, Robert A Montgomery5.
Abstract
Despite the key roles that dispersal plays in individual animal fitness and meta-population gene flow, it remains one of the least understood behaviors in many species. In large mammalian herbivores, dispersals might span long distances and thereby influence landscape-level ecological processes, such as infectious disease spread. Here, we describe and analyze an exceptional long-distance dispersal by an adult white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in the central United States. We also conducted a literature survey to compare the dispersal to previous studies. This dispersal was remarkable for its length, duration, and the life history stage of the dispersing individual. Dispersal is typical of juvenile deer seeking to establish postnatal home ranges, but this dispersal was undertaken by an adult male (age = 3.5). This individual dispersed ~300 km over a 22-day period by moving, on average, 13.6 km/day and achieving a straight-line distance of ~215 km, which was ~174 km longer than any other distance recorded for an adult male deer in our literature survey. During the dispersal, which occurred during the hunting season, the individual crossed a major river seven times, an interstate highway, a railroad, and eight state highways. Movements during the dispersal were faster (mean = 568.1 m/h) and more directional than those during stationary home range periods before and after the dispersal (mean = 56.9 m/h). Likewise, movements during the dispersal were faster (mean = 847.8 m/h) and more directional at night than during the day (mean = 166.4 m/h), when the individual frequently sheltered in forest cover. This natural history event highlights the unpredictable nature of dispersal and has important implications for landscape-level processes such as chronic wasting disease transmission in cervids. More broadly, our study underscores how integrating natural history observations with modern technology holds promise for understanding potentially high impact but rarely recorded ecological events.Entities:
Keywords: chronic wasting disease; migration; movement ecology; ungulate
Year: 2021 PMID: 33976768 PMCID: PMC8093661 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.7354
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
FIGURE 1The home ranges and dispersal of N17003, an adult male white‐tailed deer inhabiting northwestern Missouri, USA in 2017–2018. Numbers indicate: (1) initial home ranges (gray circles; see Figure 2a,b), (2) an urban daytime resting/foraging site (see Figure 4a), (3) a major highway crossing (see Figure 4b), (4) a major river crossing (see Figure 4c), (5) a daytime resting/foraging site in a forest patch within an agricultural field (see Figure 4d), and (6) a final home range (gray circles; see Figure 2c). Daytime and nighttime locations are depicted as white and black circles, respectively, and black lines are major roads (primary or secondary highways). N17003 is pictured in the inset, as captured by a camera trap (image: Missouri Department of Conservation)
FIGURE 2Home ranges of N17003, an adult male white‐tailed deer inhabiting northwestern Missouri, USA in 2017–2018, prior to (a and b) and following dispersal (c). Panel a: the home range from 27 January 2017 to 4 September 2017 was 4.09 km2 and consisted of 19.0% forest cover. Panel b: the home range from 5 September 2017 to 3 November 2017 was 3.17 km2 and consisted of 39.6% forest cover. Panel c: the home range from 26 November 2017 to 20 June 2018 was 3.21 km2 and consisted of 19.3% forest cover
FIGURE 4Unique events during the dispersal of N17003, an adult male white‐tailed deer inhabiting northwestern Missouri, USA in 2017–2018. Panels show: (a) an urban daytime resting and foraging location near the beginning of the dispersal; (b) an evening crossing of a major four‐lane highway; (c) a nighttime crossing of a major river; (d) a daytime resting and foraging forest patch surrounded by agricultural fields. Note that scales are unique to each panel and that these events are also depicted in Figure 1
FIGURE 3Univariate kernels depicting the movement speeds (panels a and c) and turning angles (panels b and d) of N17003, an adult male white‐tailed deer inhabiting northwestern Missouri, USA in 2017–2018. Home ranges refer to those depicted in Figure 2
Results from a literature survey conducted in August 2020 to document long‐distance movements by white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). All study locations were within the USA. For studies that reported percentage of forested habitat, nonforest habitat was either agriculture, grassland, or developed land. Distance is the final maximum straight‐line dispersal or long‐distance movement recorded and Season is the season in which that dispersal or long‐distance movement occurred. Abbreviations: N = number of individuals tracked; GPS = global positioning system; RT = radiotelemetry; TRR = tag‐release‐return; Y = yearling; A = adult
| Study location | Habitat |
| Method | Distance (km) | Season | Sex | Stage | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nebraska & Iowa | 40% forest | 50 | RT | 6.7 | Spring | F | NA | 1 |
| Texas | Shrub rangeland | 23 | RT | 7.3 | Winter | M | Y | 2 |
| Pennsylvania | 49%–57% forest | 9 | GPS | 10.2 | Spring | M | Y | 3 |
| Minnesota | forest | 63 | TRR | 35.2 | NA | M | A | 4 |
| Wisconsin | 80% forest | 409 | RT | 35.8 | Spring | M | Y | 5 |
| Wisconsin | Predominately forest | 1 | RT | 41 | Spring | F | Y | 8 |
| Pennsylvania | 60%–88% forest | 229 | RT & GPS | 52.9 | Spring | F | Y | 6 |
| Maryland | 50% forest | 51 | RT | 56 | NA | M | Y | 7 |
| Minnesota | Mixed prairie – forest | 57 | TRR | 88 | NA | F | A | 4 |
| Illinois | 2%–3% forest | 264 | TRR | 100–120 | Spring | NA | Y | 9 |
| Wyoming | foothills | 66 | GPS | 106.6 | Spring | F | NA | 10 |
| Nebraska & Iowa | 40% forest | 85 | RT | 121 | Spring | M | Y | 11 |
| Illinois | 2%–20% forest | 267 | TRR | 161 | NA | M | Y | 12 |
| Minnesota | Contiguous forest | 79 | RT | 168 | Spring | F | Y | 13 |
| Minnesota | Agriculture (3% forest) | 77 | RT | 205 | Spring | F | A | 14 |
| South Dakota | 1% forest | 31 | TRR | 212.6 | Spring | M | Y | 15 |
References: 1 (Hygnstrom et al., 2011), 2 (McCoy et al., 2005), 3 (Long et al., 2010), 4 (Carlsen & Farmes, 1957), 5 (Peterson et al., 2017), 6 (Lutz et al., 2016), 7 (Rosenberry et al., 1999), 8 (Oyer et al., 2007), 9 (Nixon et al., 1991), 10 (Edmunds et al., 2018), 11 (Clements et al., 2011), 12 (Nixon et al., 1994), 13 (Nelson, 1993), 14 (Brinkman et al., 2005), 15 (Kernohan et al., 1994).